
Michigan resident Sherri Muzher (43) recently told a Fox
news affiliate that she wants to have an assisted suicide and donate her organs
for transplantation. She said it would be a “nice legacy to give” and that “We
ought to be able to make our own decisions, and if that collateral effect means
helping others, why would anyone have a problem with that?” Sherri’s proposal
sounds so altruistic, so selfless and generous beyond measure.
![]() |
Sherri Muzher |
![]() |
Let’s examine the reality of Sherri’s assisted suicide proposal:
If done by poisoning, there would be a high likelihood of contaminating her
organs making them unusable for transplantation. But let us pretend that
somehow she was poisoned but her organs were not. There are some medical
realities once she dies. After death there is no heartbeat, circulation or
respiration, thus no oxygen for her organs.
Without oxygen, irreparable damage would begin to occur to her liver and
heart within 4-5 minutes and her kidneys by 30 minutes, quickly making them
useless for transplantation.

Once they artificially oxygenate Sherri’s organs, it would take
about 30 minutes to remove her kidneys, 3 hours to remove her liver and about an
hour to remove her heart. Recipients would probably be waiting in adjacent
operating rooms.
Okay, take poisoning out of the scenario. If Sherri’s death
was achieved by organ removal while she has a beating heart, circulation and
respiration, it would not be an assisted suicide as she presently envisions; it
would be imposed death by a transplant surgeon. Altruistic romance and sterile
operating rooms are not a good mix, especially when death is the goal. Sherri’s death would be achieved only upon the
final removal of her heart. Her gutted and mutilated body would be returned to
her family for burial or cremation.
The Sherri Muzher case would create the thin edge of a
bloody wedge in North America. It would begin to establish a precedent for
organ procurement programs to view people with severe disabilities as sources
of much needed organs. In case you think I’m drawing an extreme case, let me inform
you that it’s already happened in Belgium.
![]() |
Wesley J. Smith |
Will people with severe disabilities (like me) be considered
commodities rather than patients in our own rite? If this happens, people who
are comatose will be at even greater risk and their families pressured to stop
life sustaining treatment or impose death.
The Sherri Muzher case would create a darker cultural
deviation and open a Pandora’s box society will ultimately wish had never been opened.
It will put other vulnerable lives at great danger and further strip our
increasingly secular society of the ideal of the sanctity of every human life.
I came across your blog while researching, "What gives human life value". What deems an individual life greater worth saving or assisting than another.
ReplyDeleteYour topic is very interesting, my view of organ donation is it should be automatic. Limited only in situations of religion. I also believe people should be able to "profit" from such a generous and selfless act. Maybe additional assistance with burial cost would drive donation. Unfortunately, in order for people to do the right thing, they have to see it in their best interest.
Patrick McMahon, tried to expose the Organ Network's actions similar to what you discussed in your article. Then, the case of Vincent Liew. It is a slippery slope. Next they will argue only low income minorities are harvested at a higher rate. Why wouldn't anyone want to give their life for the greater good of society?
You are not her. You have only in common a disease. You don't know her level of pain. Her past or present psychological trauma. Memories and experiences can't be washed away with Oxy or Morphine. Or, access to resources.
Thank you for your comment. MDP
ReplyDelete